5 comments about Courage After Fire: Coping Strategies for Troops Returning from Iraq and Afghanistan and Their Families.

1. As a disability service provider, I found this book particularly helpful. It is practical and to the point. Veterans can find tips on everything from how to sleep better to how to relax and cope with stressors. The triggers of anxiety are explained well, as are the ways veterans typically handle their pain. At the end of each chapter are helpful tips for family members. After I read it, I ordered ten copies of this book to give away to student veterans and their families.



2. I was skeptical when purchasing this book, but the topics are discussed in such a way that you do not feel like you're reading "self-help". The focus is not on PTSD (although that is one of the topics covered), but more on a healthy transition from a chaotic environment. I would recommend this to any serviceman, spouse, parent, or close friend.



3. It wasn't the war, it was when I returned home and could not function. I applaud this book for it's intent and gratitude that it gives to our young warriors. It is one of the few written for "our" generation. Thank you
   
   -Timothy Kendrick author-PTSD: Pathways Through the Secret Door



4. My son suggested I read this before he comes home from his tour of duty in Iraq. It has been very helpful to understand what he has to deal with in terms of adjusting from daily combat and normal day to day life at home. Most people don't have a clue what these brave men and women have to deal with. They cannot just turn off their emotions just because they are back home.
   Eveyone who has a loved one serving in a war zone should read this book.



5. I purchased this for my boyfriend upon him returning home from Fallujah. He didn't open it once. It's just not a book that a war veteran wants to read, or even be reminded of. He went through enough and all he really needed was professional help. Not a book that reiterates the pain and struggles that families endure.

5 comments about Licensed to Kill: Hired Guns in the War on Terror.

1. This is a great book about the war on terror. The US is changing the world of warfare in ways that are fascinating but also scary. Really strange implications for the future which should be considered. A great book.



2. Mr. Pelton's book hits a great medium. It is neither pro nor anti, it simply displays the information without bias. The stories he tells are informative and easily read. His insights from spending time with PSCs in the field are poinant in regards to the situation in Iraq as they explain what it is to drive "Route Irish" one moment and swig Whisky while smoking cigars the next. I found that the book humanized a sometimes inhuman subject; namely the business of providing security in a war torn environment.



3. This was a fantastic book. I'm having a hard time finding unbiased literature about the modern trend of PMCs (mercenary companies). Books written by conservatives paint PMCs (especially American ones) as purely patriotic and heroic organizations. They often overlooking or minimize the problems PMCs create and in some cases the crimes they have engaged in. Books written by progressives describe PMCs as evil agencies with immoral killers who profit from death, nothing more.
   
   Mr. Pelton covers how the trend toward smaller government (including militaries) have lead to the rise in PMCs. He describes incidents where mercenaries have stepped into help nations the world will only talk about. He also covers incidents where mercenaries have illegally tried to topple small governments.
   
   Unlike many "expert" authors, Pelton went to hot spots around the world to assess each situation for himself. He spoke with leaders and with people on the ground in and around the business.
   
   Pelton credits the Bush administration for creating a situation where the US military is required to rely heavily on PMCs in Iraq and for their lack of accountability. He also credits the international community's lack of involvement for the fact that smaller nations have resorted to PMCs to end their violent conflicts.
   
   If you think PMCs are the greatest thing on earth, here to promote democracy around the world, or if you think they're hired killers, here to kill innocent indigenous people in the name of corporate wealth and racist regimes, please read this book. Don't merely read books with an agreeable point of view.
   
   Mr. Pelton does express a concern about the lack of oversight and accountability with PMCs around the world, but if he was trying to push another political message, I didn't see it. Great reporting. This is a book with a wealth of information that I didn't have to read with a grain of salt or read with the mindset that the author was trying to manipulate my views one way or another.
   
   You may also want to view the DVD "Shadow Company," which covers the same topic.



4. I really enjoyed this book. A very interesting take on the life of a contractor, without the political objective.



5. Completely devoid of preaching, no axes to grind, no ideology to promote... you have to wonder how this ever got published in the USA. Not a trace of faux compassion. No uplift. In short, an almost miraculous book. Remarkable achievement.

No comments about Your Government Failed You: Breaking the Cycle of National Security Disasters.

No comments about The Politics of Chaos in the Middle East (Columbia/Hurst).

5 comments about America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It.

1. Steyn does his homework. If you like information on demographic trends, certain projects of what the future might be for Europe, Japan, and the U.S. then this is a great read.
   
   It is quite sobering and may even depress you a bit based on how Europe is changing with a massive influx of muslims coming in from Moracco the Middle East and Southeast Asia. There are a few points I would disagree with Steyn on Japan. I do believe the Japanese purposely want their population to go down slowly given the size and resources of their archipeligo nation, it isn't diminishing because of mass infusion of new workers from the Islamic world. For the Japanese, it's a shrewd move on their part.
   
   However, Europe is another issue. It's a mess. The caucasian races are not producing children and to keep their over-inflated social systems in place (something we may have contributed in the formation with the Marshall Plan)... they need new workers, blood, even if it comes from the places vastly different in values to their own. The French city riots that happened a few years ago had substantially large numbers of youth from muslim households. Certain laws in England have been changed to accommodate a more aggressive Islamic population living there. These are only a few of the changes being seen today.
   
   Steyn gives some provocative points and a decent level of raw and refined data to show this demographic shift. The long-term ramifications are what shaped the title of the book... "America Alone." That sense that we might be alone among the nations may happen sooner than we imagine. Although there are some who would say we always have been "alone," and that America has always marched to a different drummer than the Europeans.
   
   Overall, a good read, and definitely a source of discussion for many. I do recommend his work. Admittedly, it focuses on demographics, and I feel Steyn could have expanded this further.



2. For anyone concerned about the threat of radical Islam and had always planned to research more about it, Mark Steyn has done us a great service. He lays out clearly the depth and breadth of the threat, and it is sobering to behold. Insightful and well-written. In fact, it's so well-written it cost him a star - there are plenty of times he is so eager to show you what a gifted writer he is that he fails to communicate. Well worth your time, though.



3. Interesting and griping fact centered book. However, authors attempt at humor while writing of such a serious subject did not sit well with me. I am so afraid he is right, just not funny.



4. I read Mark Steyn's America Alone, when it came out last fall, I haven't had a good night's sleep since.
   
   The whole time I was reading this book, I kept hearing the Gwen Stefani cover of "It's the end of the world as we know it" (but I didn't feel fine) for all those who think America is not that great, try to imagine a world without the USA. The only country in history that had the power to subjegate the world, that didn't try. You can take all the conspiracy theories for what you think they are worth, but the demographic trends oulined here are truly frightening.



5. Heard great review on talk radio and had to read it myself. Great book. Perhaps too many attempts at humor, but still a great read.

5 comments about Bush's Law: The Remaking of American Justice.

1. I'm really disappointed that Lichtblau and others in the press can't seem to look at all of the available facts when reporting on the Bush presidency and the war on terror. Allow me to explain: We're all worried about possible erosion of civil liberties and the ongoing war in Iraq, but if the press does not engage in neutral reporting, then how are we ever going to keep our civil liberties? In making our decisions about what to do, we need to know if the press is giving us the full facts of the story or instead presenting parts of a story to push its point of view. I feel that Lichtblau is doing the later.
   
   The New York Times, for which Lichtblau writes, is noted for its anti-Bush reporting practices. See Bush's War: Media Bias and Justifications for War for details. While the press is now saying it did not do enough to stop Bush, this book looks at about 5 years of press coverage and claims that starting about 8 weeks after 9/11 the press began to frame Bush as an enemy and to actively oppose his policies. Lichtblau does not take this type of criticism into consideration, but pushes the "Bush lied, people died" meme even further. See Alterman for an example of this: The Book on Bush: How George W. (Mis)leads America.
   
   Evidence that contradicts Lichtblau is out there, and I would have liked to seen him and others come right out and take on accusations of bias rather than just ignoring it. Instead its more of the same stuff I read in the New York Times on a regular bases. So that is why I'm disappointed in this book; I wanted something new and fresh that would tackle the fuller picture. There just really does not seem to be any surprises here.



2. This is a good solid work about law and justice in the Bush Administration. It's a story of good and evil, law and lawlessness, trust and distrust. You might want to consider first reading Robert Conquest's fine book The Great Terror, which is about the purges, the show trials, law and justice under Stalin. Much is different, of course, but there are some uncomfortable parallels. Perhaps the most striking thing in The Great Terror was that under Stalin, being suspected of anti-Soviet activities was a serious crime. This is not the same as actually being guilty of such activity, but rather just the fact that you had been suspected (even if totally innocent, as the vast majority were) earned you a trip to the cellars to be shot, or a death sentence in the labor camps. Bush's Law makes it clear that suspicion earns punishment in one form or another.
   
   Bush's Law emphasizes the use and misuse of national security letters, the bypassing of the normal legal safeguards, the punishments for Justice Department and FBI people who "weren't on the team". Loyalty becomes the paramount virtue: "meine ehre heist treue" (my honor is loyalty). The book talks about the firings of the US Attorneys: being "loyal Bushies" was crucial to being kept on, and the dissembling explanations by Gonzales and the White House made a mockery of the traditional image of blind justice with a scales in one hand and a sword in the other. The book describes how Gonzales explored the possibilities of prosecuting journalists under the Espionage Act of 1917. You get the strong impression that a free press was considered a greater threat to America than al Qaeda.
   
   For a book on a similar subject, try Clive Smith's Eight O'Clock Ferry to the Windward Side. The focus here is limited to Guantanamo: the treatment of the prisoners, the lack of hearings, the regarding of lawyers for the detainees as the enemy. It's a very depressing book, and it packs a very powerful punch indeed. Taken together, Bush's Law is primarily about the threats to Americans when laws are routinely broken and the Constitution is regarded as an annoyance, Smith's book is an extension: without the safeguards, without some judges and the free press standing up, the next steps could lead to Guantanamos, and then another few steps perhaps to the Soviet system where the law is whatever authority says it is, and justice is meaningless. What Bush's Law describes is not new: we might do well to ponder on John Mitchell (Nixon's Attorney General) who had serious discussions about the possibility of kidnapping war protesters and sending them to secret Soviet-style gulags. We can also think about the death threats Lichtblau describes, and the suggestions that he and other reporters be arrested, tried for treason, and hanged. There are those who believe that the war on terror justifies any suspension of civil liberties and justifies any actions by those in authority. Such people are not alone: Stalin, Hitler, and Mao had large numbers of adherents who felt the same way. So--a good book, replete with heroes and villians galore.



3. This is a very impressive and unusual book written by a reporter who has covered the Justice Dept for a long time. There have been any number of good books published about the War on Terror and the Bush Administration's response to it. What sets Licthblau's book apart from the rest is that large sections are written in the first person and not only recount the events and facts but describe the mindset and calculus employed by policymakers who in real time had to make the decisions necessary to protect the country from follow-up attacks after September 11. Perhaps the strongest chapter in the book details the pressure the White House put on the New York Times that led the paper--much to Licthblau's chagrin--to hold off on publishing the story about NSA's surveillance program for a year. For this reason, I agree with the reviewer in the NY Times book review who wrote that this book is the equivalent of Woodward and Bernstein's classic "All the President's Men" for the terror age.



4. I asked my husband to read this book. He is learned in History, especially U.S. History, and I was interested in his remarks. He was surprised at the depth of the deception taking place by the Bush Administration and the assault on our civil rights.



5. It took me a while to read this book. Not because it wasn't well written, on the contrary, it is an extremely well written book. No, I could only stomach around 20 or so pages at a time, before I was so angry I had to put it down. This is a must read for people who want to know what the Bush Administration has been up to for the last few years. Unfortunately, some of the details cannot be included, as they are either unknown or classified. In any case, a book that flows, that is easy to read and has (IMHO) one of the most pressing themes of today.

5 comments about Energy Victory: Winning the War on Terror by Breaking Free of Oil.

1. The book makes a very good case, why ethanol should be used when ever possible to save fosil fuel and keep more money within our own country. It also creates good clean honest jobs.



2. Zubrin's argument is beyond compelling, and quite effectively brushes aside all the objections to alcohol fuels you see bandied about.
   
   In short, we must mandate all cars sold from now on in the US be flex-fueled (ethanol, methanol, gasoline) or biodiesel (diesel, biodiesel, or straight-vegetable oil). This will crush OPEC's monopoly power and unleash a billion farmers to become mini-oil tycoons. The potential to alleviate poverty in Africa alone makes this extremely worthwhile.
   
   Sure there will be some undesirable side effects to producing so much methanol/ethanol, but the fact is we have no other choice. Corn/soybeans are not the answer. Sugarcane, coal syngas, and random biomass are. Brazil is 100% energy independent, and we can be too. Granted, they don't have a great record on protecting the Amazon, but this is not either/or, they just need to manage their land better and use efficient crops like sugarcane.
   
   We cannot be supplicants to OPEC any longer, and this book shows how to break free.
   
   Warning: the book becomes a bit of a polemic toward the end, but that does not diminish the power of the basic arguments. It's a very entertaining read in any case.



3. This is an excellent book!! Buy this book! Zubrin has a convincing solution to most of the problems confronting America. and the world. He advocates a Federal mandate that all cars sold in the US should be flex fuel . He shows that this would solve the problems of energy dependence,terrorism, global warming, third world poverty, and illegal immigration.This is a very practical book written by a nuclear engineer with an elegant practical solution to most of our problems. If you don't believe me read this book and make up your own mind.



4. I think this is a brilliantly argued book. I think he does well in establishing the link between petrodollars and Islamofascist terrorism. Of course, the problem created by our heavy reliance on imported oil goes beyond that in our huge balance of payments shortfall. Our reliance on imported oil also slowly drains away our defense and strategic power. Meanwhile, this generation's strategic "wise men" are all on the Saudi payroll.
   
   Most importantly, Zubrin thoroughly debunks hydrogen as a vehicle fuel. I already knew that based on an investment I made in the 1990's. When the consulting engineers said that it would take 22 hydrogen tanker trucks to replace 1 gasoline tanker truck, it was time for me to bail out. According to Zubrin, it only gets worse: it takes more energy to produce hydrogen than the hydrogen reaction produces. The road to hydrogen leads nowhere.
   
   Zubrin punctures a criticism of alcohol fuels that is currently being made. Ethanol made from corn is not causing food shortages. Most of the corn produced in America is used for animal feed and the alcohol extracted from the corn still leaves the corn mash available as animal feed. But alcohol fuel, especially methanol, can be made from practically any plant life. The argument against corn based ethanol is not that it causes food shortages but that it requires heavy federal subsidies when there are other less expensive alternatives available.
   
   The key to his argument is the Flex Fuel vehicle which, with $150 worth alcohol compatible hoses and sensors, can run on various alcohol-gasoline mixtures: E85, M85. These are vehicles you can buy right now with well tested technology. You can buy the vehicles, but in most parts of the country, you can't buy the fuel. Zubrin argues that a federal law is needed to make all vehicles flex fuel vehicles. Zubrin made the argument to the Bush Administration, which declined to support him because they opposed additonal vehicle mandates.
   
   Zubrin didn't make this argument, but I think if flex fuel became a requirement of all vehicles, then the CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) requirements and the Air Quality waivers could be phased out. I can't understand why, unless I'm unaware, the domestic auto companies haven't made that argument. It would make their life much easier and less expensive.
   
   Zubrin does make the argument that the CAFE is irrelevant in any event because we will never be able to gain control of fuel prices through conservation. OPEC can set the spigot up and down at will.
   
   
   Two final notes: Zubrin makes a good case for coal based methanol. Since we have large reserves of coal sitting in the ground because of the sulphur burning problem and acid rain, methanol extraction would allow us to use that resource without the enviornmental damage caused by burning coal. Zubrin also recounts the Brazilian experience with ethanol, which was a very bumpy road when oil prices fell in the 1990's. Getting free from OPEC may require imported oil tariffs because alcohol fuel mixtures are only competitive when the price of oil is about twice as high as the price per gallon of alcohol due to alcohol's mileage penalty. Of course, widespread production and distribution of e85 and m85 might become much more economical than current prices would suggest.
   
   I think these ideas are worth pursuing.



5. After his push to colonize that utterly useless world called Mars (the real wealth of the solar system is in the Asteroid Belt and icy moons, easily available and not at the bottom of a gravity well), Zubrin moves on to another political boondoggle, ethanol.
   
   His arguments fail on nearly every point. The argument about unused farmland is especially irrelevant. Even if all of the arable land in the US were dedicated to alcohol production (including switchgrass, cellulosic ethanol, and methanol), the most we could ever hope to achieve is to replace about 15% of our gasoline usage (representing at most about 10% of our total oil imports dedicated to gasoline production). Let's see, starve the world to replace ~1/10 of one's oil imports? Don't think so.
   
   Most seriously, the energy balance is not there. It takes about 11 barrels of oil to produce the ethanol energy equivalent of 10. That's an energy return of about 1.1 to 1. Actually when one factors in storage and transport issues it's much lower, maybe down to 1 to 1 (breakeven) or even lower (net loss). If you have a company that you are trying to save from bankruptcy, do you pour your resources into a division that breaks even or loses money? Not if you hope to remain in business for long.
   
   Pointing to the success of Brazil provides no solution for the US either. Brazil straddles the Equator and receives about 22% greater solar energy flux than the US does. That, along with a more efficient crop (sugar cane) and a year-round growing season, gives Brazil an energy return of about 5 to 1. One unintended consequence of this "success", however, is that rainforest destruction (remember the rainforest?) has accelerated at an alarming rate due to more and more acres of it being turned into fuel.
   
   Ethanol and other bio-fuels, far from providing an energy "victory" for the US, will only lead to an energy "defeat", and starve the rest of the world in the process.

5 comments about The Shell Game.

1. This book is equivalant to a 9/11 "DaVinci Code" it exposes much of what our government has done in the past all wrapped around a story about what they could do in the future... I read it in like 4 days... very good read.



2. A technically rich thriller that escalates oil as the catalyst to political treachery. Alten pulls out all the stops and delivers an engaging read. If you're looking for villains and good guys thrown into a web of perilous world events, you won't be disappointed.
   
   In a personal note at the beginning, Alten disputes being "far from liberal, and the Democrats feel my wrath in the story as well as the Republicans." He spins a story, though, that buys wholeheartedly into every post 9-11 conspiracy, casting Republican administrations as instigators, organizers, and suppressors of the 9-11 attacks. If you think that way, you'll delight in the permutations of "The Shell Game." If you prefer balanced thought, you won't find a lot of that here. In the world of "The Shell Game," the heroes all buy into the conspiracy theory. It's probably just a coincidence of time and place that they all happen to be liberal-leaning Democrats. The villains include Islamic extremists among, without giving away the plot of the game, co-conspirators that go all the way to the top of the U.S. administration--who happen to be Republicans. The cause celeb is environmentalism, with nods to global warming and diminishing oil supplies.
   
   In what seems to be the thematic diatribe, a critic lambastes: "There wouldn't be any Islamic extremists if we weren't addicted to oil, there wouldn't be an Al-Quaeda if we hadn't funded an Afghanistan resistance against the Soviets, Saddam would have never been a threat if we hadn't armed him, or Iran, or the other puppet regimes the CIA set up so our administrations could pull the strings." Such a summation does as little justice to history stretching back thousands of years before America came along to be the villain of the Islamic world. Of all the fighting that has never ceased in the Islamic sand pile, being able to blame U.S. policy is a historically recent, convenient target.
   
   Alten has plenty of opportunity in his well-researched novel to voice arguments against his premise, to find faults in logic, and show conspiracies on both sides of complex struggles. But the author seems too engaged in a one-sided diatribe, so that he misses opportunities to weave a tapestry of deceit that could have doubled the peril factor and intrigue of the book far beyond the story Alten seemed so intent to tell.



3. I am a person who always reads non-fiction but in this case, I took exception and decided to indulge myself in this work- my first in many many years. Simply WOW! I read the entire book in a matter of a day. I could not put it down. I needed to know what would happen next after each chapter. Even though it is a work of fiction whether or not you are a conspiracy theorist, it draws your attention. I'd suggest anyone who reads this, see it as a work of fiction and not view it as a reference based in reality. It's mere entertainment- and I loved it!!! If you want something that is more comprehensive and is non-fiction read other books related to peak oil, 9/11, Iran, and/or terrorism. Having stated that, I must admit though while reading, it made me think about certain issues related to the War on Terrorism and oil. You can take certain "facts" from the book and based them in reality but it is far from being comprehensive. I highly recommend this book to anyone who loves political thrillers.



4. I'm half-way through this exciting book now and look forward to each reading session. With this author, twists are at every turn. This is a talent with which not all authors are blessed and makes for a pleasurable read. The author has researched his topic well. I've learned facts I would probably never known on this subject. I'm not a reader of novels usually but this is such a thriller and so immediately relevant to our political reality, I am impressed. Highly recommended!



5. A great read...but read BETWEEN the lines and learn the truth about current events..the is more to this story than a novel of the future..recent history is on display here for those who can see. Buy many copies - give them to your friends and family - let's get this made into a movie NOW!

5 comments about Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001.

1. "Ghost Wars" is a very good, well documented, presentation of facts leading up to 9-11, focusing mainly on the CIA's involvement in Afghanistan starting with the anti-Soviet rebellion in the early 1980's.
   
   What comes through very clear is how complex the situation was, presenting very little options which could ever work out well. Probably the USSR would have broken apart even if we weren't involved in Afghanistan. Plus, in the early 80's the US was so paranoid of Afghanistan going communist and therefore a secular society, we were distributing CIA-printed Korans to the Afghan rebels. Muslim jihadis must have been laughing at us.
   
   As the book points out, the real reason we wanted to be involved in Afghanistan was because of eventual control of a proposed Afghan oil pipeline, where the oil company, Unocal, was front and center in influencing our actions, even wanting in the late 90's to negotiate and partner with the Taliban.
   
   One thing kind of funny in it is when Bush was campaigning before the 2000 election, reporters/journalists were asking Bush pop questions to see his responses. One journalist mentioned "Taliban". Bush just shook his head in silence. Then the journalist gave him a hint, and Bush said something about repression of women in Afghanistan, but then said he first thought it was a band.
   
   This book definitely belongs in one's collection of books trying to understand things related to 9-11 and as a basis for understanding the 'War on Terror'.



2. This was a great novel, go buy Detained Differences by J. Robert Rowe. It is about Detainee Operations inside Afghanistan.



3. An excellent book for those interested in the politics of The Afghanistan - Russian conflict and its out come setting the seeds for 9/11.



4. "Ghost Wars" is an excellent, exciting, and very carefully researched and footnoted documentation of how the United States government, from the time of Reagan, supported and encouraged the forces that became the Taliban. The writer, Steve Coll, is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and writer who was managing editor of the Washington Post from 1998 to 2004.
   
   This is very important information for understanding why and how international relations have become so very complex and violent, and why simple yes/no and us/them declarations miss the point entirely.
   
   Should be required reading in high school and college, immediately.



5. Very much an in-depth history of our times. This book describes activities that were lightly or never reported in the news yet had and have extreme bearing on US policy and current conditions in the Middle East. Well researched book with lengthy reference list.

5 comments about War and Decision: Inside the Pentagon at the Dawn of the War on Terrorism.

1. I have now finished the book but the number of negative reviews posted here still suggests that half a review by someone who has read the book carefully was better than what else is on offer so far. I have not altered my comments since reading the rest but have a few additional observations. This is a personal story of Feith's career in the DoD, before and during the Iraq War. He comments on contacts with others but he does not offer general statements or philosophy about matters that he is not personally familiar with. He does, however, offer some conclusions at the end about what was done well and what the mistakes were. He is honest about identifying his opinions and what he believes to be facts. This is a source document for the history that will be eventually written, hopefully fairly, about this period. I marked a number of sections because they impact the mythology of the war as illustrated in the other reviews and comments.
   
   He is critical of Colin Powell, and especially, Richard Armitage, who seemed not to be as concerned with the post-Saddam situation yet who resisted anyone else treading on their turf. His first skirmish was in 2002 (page 173) when he attempted to set up an office, called Office of Strategic Influence, to counteract the Islamist propaganda about why violent jihad was becoming a threat. Some went back to the old "root causes" excuse yet the Saudi hijackers of 9/11 were upper middle class educated men. His effort came to naught when the office was attacked in a strategic leak from within the administration, followed by a sensational NY Times article that accused them of planning to spread false information. Another similar article was printed recently about another DoD effort to reach Muslims with honest information. In his conclusions, he points out that we still do not have any serious effort to counter jihadist rhetoric.
   
   He refutes (page 197) another charge, prominent in another review here, that Chalabi was a "creature" of DoD and Feith was his "sponsor." One would think that the fact the Chalabi has been a major official in the Iraq government would put to rest that old CIA smear but it lives on on Amazon pages. He tells the story of CIA incompetence and the firestorm created when a 20-year DIA expert on his staff wrote a critical briefing (page 265) pointing out how CIA had ignored links between Saddam and al Qeada before the war. On page 278, he recounts another example of State's conflicted thinking where they advise against an "occupation" but their antipathy toward the "externals" (exiles like Chalabi) leads them to plan for a "many year" occupation and rule before an Iraqi government can be set up. The insurgency gained force from resentment at that policy. He points out with some understandable satisfaction that the "externals," including the Kurds who CIA predicted would not be accepted by other Iraqis, constituted almost the entire interim government that took over from Bremer and the CPA in 2004.
   
   He has some mixed opinions about Paul Bremer, pointing out how Bremer took too much authority, resisting any consultation with Rumsfeld, his superior in the chain-of-command, and made a number of serious mistakes. The most serious one was excluding the Iraqis from governing their own country for as long as he did. The insurgency might never have gained the support of so much of the Sunni population had the "Occupation" not been so obvious.
   
   I don't say this is the last word and Feith seems to resist many generalizations. This is an objective account and very valuable. He has his deficiencies. The most serious is the fact the he never mentions the tribal nature of the Iraqi society. This was a major mistake in the early history of our post-Saddam attempts to govern the country and fight the insurgency.
   
   I have read many books on this subject and the ones I respect, beginning with The Threatening Storm by Kenneth Pollack, all mostly agree. For example, another review here mentions Bob Baer and his book about Aghanistan and Gary Berntsen and "Jawbreaker" also about Afghanistan. I have read both books and Baer, in particular, dismisses his CIA bosses pointing out the lack of language skills in CIA. This lack, and the ignorance of the culture, was a major factor in the CIAs poor performance in Iraq and is discussed by Feith. He is chiefly critical of CIA implying that their information was better sourced than it was. They concealed how few assets they had in Iraq (none) and led others astray who placed more faith in their reports than was warranted. Better to confess ignorance than mislead.
   
   The dissent, like some of the other reviews here, comes with plenty of invective and obscenity but few facts. I still think this is an important book that anyone trying to understand our policy on fighting militant Islam should read. I'm sure Feith is evening a few scores here but he marshals lots of facts and refers to other documents to support his conclusions. This is an essential book, not least because he is such a controversial figure. The abuse he has taken from partisans is outrageous. At one point (page 388) he mentions a particularly odious slur attributed to Colin Powell by Bob Woodward in which Feith's office in the DoD is described as "a Gestapo office" ignoring the fact that Feith's father was a Holocaust survivor. Powell denied making the remark and apologized to Feith, whom he had known for 20 years, but the tone was set.



2. At last, a sensible, informed history from one of the responsible participants in these events.
   
   I think it is skilfully written and I found it a joy to read, not just for the language mastery and informed history, but for the careful clarity, perspective, humility and sensitive care in purpose. I think it is a valuable insight into some truly capable people in action; standing up, discerning and doing the right thing, and doing their best, even when its really challenging, even when there is voluminous opposition, and when the stakes are very, very high. People who will find a way to rise and meet a challenge no matter how high, and some who don't. I found it exciting and inspiring to read, and a wonderful example of how to behave well that I will treasure.
   
   Clearly, the integrity of the free world was in some fine hands here.
   
   I loved it. Thanks.



3. The inside story of a defining moment of American character. Want to know what Colin Powel is really like? Want to know how much control the President really has over foreign policy? Read it.



4. Fact #1: State Dept is competent & trustworthy (anonymous sources say so)
   Fact #2: CIA is competent & trustworthy (anonymous sources say so)
   Fact #3: DoD is secretive and incompetent (anonymous sources say so)
   So how can anyone write a book that disproves those facts?
   Well, actually, it turns out it's really really easy to disprove those facts.



5. Wow this is an important definiton of managed major media news -- as well ad the agenda driven, risk adverse CIA and Department of State -- "Let's go along and get along, we will pay the consequences some other time" and "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts.
   
   I marvel at the detail of notes and memory of the author -- some times a bit more than needed to make the point. So, we are required to do a bit of digging through the meetings and conversations to get to the meat. But so be it.
   
   The author also defines that one of the unfortunate points in the Iraq war coverage is the administration's lack of P.R. capabilities, leaving the public to the twisted interpretation of the initiation and conduct of the war to the major news media.